Pope Opens Mouth; Inserts Foot

[Cyberman]

1. The rule is no trolling
2. I've clearly pointed out what is trolling in my opinion
3. I think all of the staff have told me that they don't agree with what I see as trolling
4. The only difference in opinion is based upon the belief position of the observer
5. Reporting an offense of trolling to a group that don't agree with your judgement of trolling is pointless
6. The staff warn against pointless reporting wasting their time

1. The rule goes on to explain its heading, surprisingly.

Trolling is where a person makes a deliberately provocative posting with the aim of inciting an angry response, and is not allowed. As discussions can at times get heated, not all provocative posts will get classed as trolling. However, if a member is found to be making multiple such posts, or appear to only be using the forum to provoke people, they will be in violation of this rule.

I didn't have a hand in the grammar, which does grate I'll admit.

2. Your opinion as to what constitutes trolling is fine and that's why we ask you to report it. But if your opinion, which you're already said is subjective, disagrees with the rules and the behind the scenes deliberations as to their application, you might want to think about reappraising your opinion.

3. See 2.

4. Sure about that? That's the only difference?

5. Reporting is never pointless. It's the primary method of communicating your opinions on rule interpretation, and ours by decision.

6. Pointless reporting? Or frivolous, maybe even vindictive reporting? Basically there's a world of difference between reporting suspected rule breaches and basically trolling the report system - as tautological as that might appear. That system is a vital part of Staff monitoring and ought not to be abused.

Got any more, or are you done with this?